By Jennifer Perry
To read Part One of this story, click here.
To read Part Two of this story, click here.
“Solid planning work is now being done on how to tie stations in with a good mix of development to create stations as destinations rather than simply the origin of a CBD based journey,” Professor Carey Curtis at Curtin University, who is also a partner at the Australasian Centre for Governance and Management of Urban Transport and an affiliate with the WA Planning and Transport Research Centre said.
One of the major challenges with TOD is the critical need for collaboration across and between levels of government, the private sector and the community, the director of Queensland’s Department of Infrastructure and Planning’s TOD Coordination Unit, Jemina Dunn said.
The Queensland Government has also had to address the challenge of many of the proposed TOD projects occurring on rail lines that serve both passenger and freight rail.
“A number of railway corridors across the SEQ network carry freight and dangerous goods which adds to the complexity and cost of development,” Dunn said, adding that this can significantly impact a project’s viability.
“Development near transit infrastructure can also give rise to conflicts with respect to environmental emissions…TOD encourages increasing density of development close to transport facilities and therefore can be expected to increase the importance of this issue.”
Another issue is the significant potential for conflict in land-use between the noise and vibration of a railway and the living space within a TOD that is located close to or over a station.
“Whilst impacts from noise, vibration and particulates from transport infrastructure need to be managed to some extent through materials and design of  [the] railway…new development in proximity to transport infrastructure also has a responsibility to manage the impacts of these emissions,” Dunn said.
“In this way appropriate development can coexist with, and support the use of public transport infrastructure.”
Professor Curtis said that Melbourne is another example of a city that has begun implementing TOD.
“Melbourne’s metropolitan planning strategy, Melbourne:2030 recognised the need to integrate land-use around public transport and they now have a transit cities program which came out of that strategy,” she said.
“Eight transit cities were identified, where the state and local governments are working hard to think about TOD around those stations.”
Professor Curtis said that with complex development work for land around transit stations requiring coordination across a whole sector of agencies and communities, when it comes to different TOD delivery models, PPPs are by far achieving the best results. This is because you get the “best of both worlds”: Integrated development and using the state to facilitate and encourage things to happen.
“When we reviewed our station precincts in Perth to see what’s out there on the ground, the real changes that occurred in precincts were those that were led by the public sector and this is probably the case elsewhere as well,” she said.
And what might the future hold for TOD in Australia?
Dunn believes that as developable urban land becomes scarcer, volumetric air rights will become more and more attractive to the  development industry.
“Currently in SEQ, the complexity and associated costs of constructing over operational rail (due to the need for track closures and dangerous goods blast protection etc) has not supported high levels of developer interest in volumetric development,” Dunn explained.
“Developments adjacent to rail however, are expected to be designed to protect future opportunities for volumetric development which will become more attractive as the scarcity of developable inner city land increases into the future.”
For more information on TOD see Professor Curtis’ new publication:
Transit Oriented Development Making it Happen
www.ashgate.com/isbn/9780754673156
 
“
